(05-02-2014 05:07 PM)Raptor Jesus Wrote: You are not supposed to know “real truth” from the nose of Penocchio. The nose is not about truth. It's about lies. The nose cannot provide you with truth, only expose lies.

But indirectly it can expose the truth, by eliminating lies.

But I believe the heart of your question was "real truth", meaning what if he tells a what he believes is a lie, but it turns out to be true in reality, or he tells what he believes is the truth, but it turns out to not be true in reality.

There is a flaw in this. It only grows in response to Pinocchio telling a lie he knows he is lying about, or believes he's lying about. For instance, if you asked Pinocchio, "How much cash do I have in my pocket?" if he guessed wrong his nose would not grow, nor would it grow if he guessed right. That's because he's not lying, he's guessing. If you asked, "Pinocchio, do you know that is the correct amount of money in my pocket" and he said yes, then it would grow, because he knows he is lying about knowing.

So you can't us his nose to, say, predict who will win next year’s Super Bowl, for example, by asking him to say the name of every team in the NFL and see what happens. His nose does not work that way. You cannot reveal great mysteries of the universe through his nose. Only whether or not Penocchio himself is lying.

~So saith Jiminy~

OK, clear as mud so I'll buy it! So if Jiminy asked Penocchio if he evolved, or was created as a cricket, would the response cause his nose to grow?

That's tricky, I would assume it would only grow if what he perceived as a lie was told.
Basically would ignorance be a factor? Is it truly lying if you don't know the truth?
~questions that keep me up at night~

I would like to take you up on your offer and challange you to go to the collosseum with me. Just as a test and for the fun of it. I would ask you questions, and that would be pretty much almost all that I would do. Do you accept?

(05-02-2014 04:14 PM)Drich Wrote: I know you have ask a theist sticky already, but I wanted to take this time to ask you all if anyone had any questions before I stirred this pot again...

If not then maybe you could tell me what intrest you the most:

How to defeat the Epicurus Parodox

God does not love everyone

Hell

Messengers/angels

Is God truly Omni-max?

Freewill and what the bible has to say about it

Which church is the right one out of 30,000 different expressions of Christanity

Sin/repentance and what it truly means

Homosexuality, is it a sin

Genesis over view

(these are a few I have more if you like.)

Boring. Buncha meaningless old uninteresting drivel. I repeat : "What exactly qualifies to discuss ANY of this ?" You proved in your first two threads you lack even a basic education in any of these subjects. With 33,000 sects of Christians, that label is actually lacking any meaning. Of course it's YOUR church that's the *right* one...I'd be willing to bet.

Insufferable know-it-all.
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche

(05-02-2014 05:59 PM)lookingforanswers Wrote: @DRich, I posted this on your intro thread, but maybe you haven't seen it, so I'll repost it here:

@DRich, I have a question for you, which forms part of the reason why I favour deism to Christianity. I would be interested to hear your answer to it.

Why would God rely on written words in a book to carry his word to the people of the world?

He didn't/doesn't. If you look at the history of the church bibles in the hands of believers are a relative new thing. The bible was only found in manuscript form till about 1450 and even then it was still in latin (only clergy could read it) for another 100 years. Many were burned at the stake for just quoting scripture in English, let alone translating a whole bible. (there were those who were burned for teaching their children to say the lord's prayer in English durning that time.) After which the tynsdale bible was the first printed in the English and it was reserved for the church of England between the mid 1520s till 1611 several different English bibles were printed all for the use of the church but for the most part were all taken from one form of latin or another. In 1611 the KJV came off the presses. By the mid 16th century the KJV became avaiable to the masses. even so illeritacy kept it out of the hands of the common man for another 100 to 150 years.http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-englis...e-history/

Quote:I'll elaborate a little bit on why I pose this question.

First of all, there is no such thing as an international language. Any word of God published in a book is going to inevitably require translation for most of the people of the world to be able to understand it, and any translation is going to be fallible because it is done by human hands.

Indeed as with any translation there is a large room for error as translations are generally considered literal, or contextual. Literal Meaning translations are translated as close to the orginal as the translated language will allow. The draw back to this is one looses all of the intricacies of the orginal writtings. The intended meanings, the cultural undertones, the slang is all lost to the syntax and grammar corrections of the translated language.

Then there are contextual translations these translations are usually church sponsered and have twisted the orginal works and turned them to fit established church doctrines. These can be very dangerous. That is why the vast majority of the bibles are considered literal translations.

Which is why we were never commanded to follow the exact letter of the law. We were given a command to simply be faithful to what God has given us. Meaning to honor what our understanding of Christianity is to the absolute best of our ability. That is the goal post Christ set in the parable of the talents.

Quote:Second of all, God knows the skepticism that exists in humankind. Why would he put his word in a book, when humans know that books can be forged and that the words written by other humans can be lies?

The bible is not God. The bible is the key to God. If one want to know God or have proof of God the bible is the key to establishing and maintaining that relationship.

Once the relationship with God has been established then one will be able to connect and attribute legitmacy for what it says God will do for the believer in what the believer experiences in his or her own life.

Quote:Wouldn't he trust his word to be conveyed to humans in a way where he knows that humans would be able to know for sure that the word came from God?

as in directly from the Holy Spirit? Yes! But, how does one know the revelation he receives is from the Holy Spirit? After all Mormonism and Islam were both started on what seemed like direction from God. That's where the bible comes back in. Because the same Holy Spirit that inspired the word now indwells you, and because of that the two will never be in conflict.

Quote:After all, how do we know that one of the books that slipped into the Bible wasn't the work of a fraud, who tried to pass off his own work as the word of God?

because 'we' have only been charged to be responsible to what we have been given. It is God's responsiablity to either forgive us for following the corrupted text or to change said text with like a Dead Sea scroll discovery.

Quote:Third, why would God send his message to only some and not all of the people's of the world? By appearing as a man to the Israelites he could certainly pass on his word to them, but why did he not favour the Peruvian natives in the same way? Why would he not bring his word to all the nations of the world, who at that time in history often didn't know of each other's existence at all?

how do you know He didn't? Maybe the Jews were the only ones who listened.

Quote:Anyways, I'm interested to know your answer. For me, those questions are part of the reason why I am a deist. I believe that God speaks to man through his creation, the Universe, which constitutes a universal language that is available for everyone to see, cannot be forged and does not require interpretation into any particular human language.

the problem there is God is not the only one from that plain of existence who speaks to man. How do you sift or weigh what has been said if you do not have an absolute standard in which to judge your revelation?

Quote:We can learn everything we need to know about God through the combination of the intelligence with which he endowed us, the senses he has given us and his word as expressed through the universe that he created.

Actually God tells us the opposite. In that Nothing can be known of God unless God/The Holy Spirit reveals it to us.

Thank you for reporting your questions I did not see the. The first time around. If you have any more I will be glad to look at them.